Moonshine Fox

Yeah, I was just pressed for time when I made the initial post, so I didn't actually think about the suggestions forum. Will do!

Reading the first pages, I realized that maybe having the country region relations show up as a color shade on the geoscape map could be something. Some people might not like it, so make it toggleable, but it would give a very ready and obvious feedback on where you need to focus your efforts. A country could go from Green (good/starting relation) towards blue (really good), or towards red (bad relations) and finally black when "lost". Ideas?

I demand Scandinavians! (No I don't.)

I'd rather we stayed away from the cinematic stuff. No one in their right mind would use two guns simultaneously in real life. It'd wreck your accuracy as well as making any reloading completely impossible without first dropping one of the weapons. I say NO to this.

The AuzzieGamer? Does reviews and Let's Plays. Has around 50k subs.

I like the plan and go system, and always have since its inception in early games such as Laser Squad Nemesis and more recently in games such as Frozen Synapse (even though in those games you have sets chunks of time, rather than freeform pausing). But that's the nicest thing I can say about the game. To me, it's not worthy of carrying the JA tag at all. It's a "meh" to "okay"-ish game at best.

I'll let the picture speak for itself, because I can't explain it in words.

It's pretty concrete to me. Any soldier wearing Jackal armor and an M16 or Shotty will revert to normal jumpsuit when vaulting.

I did not load a game (went straight from shooting down a UFO into ground combat) and I could pass through the metal "shack" walls of the farm tileset without issue.

I'm just curious as to why Goldhawk went with dropping the "Drag the heading indicator for speed" when there's an ongoing discussion on how to change the speed of airplanes in combat. >_<

That last post was an excellent explanation and I totally agree with you. That's a very interesting way of making the game progress, rather than making it largely time-based as the old X-Com games were. Actually basing alien progression on them having to finish missions kinda puts it in the same boat as UFO: The Two Sides (the now cancelled multiplayer remake of XCOM) where the aliens had to finish missions and avoid XCom in order to progress. Of course, it was in alpha so it was hideously imbalanced, but it was fun nontheless

The display is very nice and I believe it would add to the game. I do prefer the nicer UFO art for this window, since the top down is a touch "bland" and you will see it red-tinted, top-down in combat anyway, so "showing off" the UFO art here is likely better.

Here's an example of the "pull the heading indicator" from Steambirds:

That's a pretty nice work there! My most heart pounding experience was this one (link to EVE-O forums), written in proper EVE Online lingo. That sure got my blood pumping, putting several billion on the line just for excitement

I don't think a soldier should have longer sight simply because he's using a sniper rifle. That would potentially be exploitable. I'm talking about upping BASE sight range and then modifying it based on armor worn. Heavy thugs would basically be like now while lighter armors would have longer than current sight range. But of course it would have to be balanced. I'm just saying that even though I had a short sight range in XCom, I never felt blind. In Xeno I do feel blind.

I have to say that the real issue with snipers in Xenonauts isn't the weapons, but the base sight range of soldiers. The sight range is in the ranges of 8-10 meters (if you make a comparison to human length) which is of course hilarous on its own, but even for a turn based tactics game it's incredibly short. To me it feels like X-Com had way longer detection ranges that this, but maybe I'm sugarcoating ot due to nostalgia. Either way, I can't escape the feeling that I'm absolutely blind while playing Xenonauts. I also have a feeling that this is going to be a compound problem when the game goes further. Imagine you have to scout the map. You can't send a soldier straight out into the black, because you do not know where the cover is. He can usually walk further than he can see, forcing you to "leap frog" forward in order to be able to take cover behind some "hopefully to be discovered cover" further ahead. I can't really see an issue with upping sight distance a bit. Can you? If you do, please share your opinion on it. I don't mind heavily armored "tank"-type assault troopers having a narrow and even short FOV, but scouts and snipers in light scouting gear should be allowed to see much further than they do.

I fail to see your concern. *Nukes New Mexico*

It all comes down to how long the turns are. If you try and make them 2-3 seconds (for aimed shot) then soldiers are running stupidly fast. If you make them 10-15 seconds (for long movement), then soldiers sure take their time to aim. It's simply not very good to translate to time, and I have to agree that it's difficult getting a second shot off if you've moved the least.

*floggs the dead horse about pulling the directional indicator forward or backwards for speed*

In that case I'm clearly a clinical psychopath but have somehow managed to have a functioning career and a successful love life and never gotten in thorns with justice. You should be careful with making sweeping statements like this, because this is what I mean with not basing your clearly biased opinions in fact. If you can somehow prove that players that grief in games are mentally disturbed in real life, then go ahead. Give me a scientific study that proves this. Until then I will disagree with you because I am living proof that you are incorrect. Just because someone chose a different play style than you does not invalidate them, nor does it make them evil. It's like saying a poker player is inherently a liar because all they do all game is try and deceive their opponents. Gaming is often about winning or losing. You winning means someone else loses. What's the problem here? I really don't get it. Does me winning in chess make me an evil person? No rebuttal? I listed your arguments and quoted every single one and replied to them one by one. Since most of them were your opinions, I responded with my opinions, except in places where you were factually wrong. I would honestly wonder what counts as not minimal upgrades by your standards then. Wikipedia a few of the additions right here and if you go through the patch notes it's literally thousands of pages of changes, additions and tweaks to the game. By your standards, WoW hasn't changed one bit since beta. There's your bias! You refuse to see facts because you hate the game, hence you judge it with a different scale than you do for other games. (I'm only using WoW as an example, btw). Also your claim of a "hostile" player base is a rather odd one. Just because players of EVE Online doesn't hold your hand (neither does the game) and expect of your take care of yourself, think first and take responsibility for your actions does not make them hostile. What does make them hostile is when people loudly whine over being ganked on a high sec gate when they were carrying billions of stuff in an untanked T1 indy. That's stupidity, and stupidity is not something that is very appreciated by the EVE playerbase. Darwinism is the rule of EVE Online and when you play it you have to adapt to that. What a player should do when faced by that situation is man up and make sure it never, ever happens again. Whining is going to change nothing because it's perfectly within game mechanics to do so. Making the argument that people should not be able to kill you or steal your stuff is like claiming that people should not be able to shoot you in MW3 or use Sniper rifles. Or even claiming that people that do kill you are "griefers". You only consider my arguments rubbish because you do not agree, or do not want to listen to them. Please point out where I am factually wrong and I will respond. Again you claim to have wasted thousands of dollars on a game that is, in your opinion, rubbish. I have to ask why? Why do you keep paying for something that is clearly not your cup of tea? It's a non-argument. You also come with unfounded accusations here with the "scamming, underdeveloped, underfunded game". Where's the court order where CCP are convicted of scamming? Also, I'm clearly agreeing with you on some points which kind of invalidates your fanboi accusation since the very definition of a fanboi is someone who relentlessly defends his thing and refuses to see anything wrong with it. Here I agree with you. After Apocrypha CCP went into "spit out new shiny stuff and fuck everything else"-mode and that I definitely disagreed heavily with. I was one of the protesters and also quit cancelled both my accounts in economic protest over it. I absolutely support both Dust 514 and Incarna, but NOT at the cost of EVE's core gameplay. That made me absolutely despise what CCP was doing. They released expansions with badly designed new mechanics, untested functions and then completely left them in the gutter. Factional Warfare is a prime example of this. It has seen zero iterations since release day. It's a rushed product with no support whatsoever. CCP Hellmar (CEO of CCP Games, Hilmar Veigar Pétursson) did something almost unheard of in the gaming industry: He manned up and said "Yes I was wrong, I screwed up badly. It's all my fault and you, the players, were right. But we're going to do it better from here on in." I can probably count on one hand how many times that have happened in gaming history. We've seen before what happens with games where the management does not listen to its players. Look att Star Wars for instance. It went down in flames and still the management did not listen, instead just spat on the players. I am willing to forgive when someone apologizes. Are you? I'm moreso willing to forgive when I've seen what they've done with Crucible and its followup quickfixes. They are right there, in my posts. If you disagree then please point out where I'm using opinion against facts and I shall try to correct myself. Fine. I absolutely respect your right to not play EVE. But do not berate it simply for berating it, and not on partly unfounded bittervetness. Bashing on EVE for lack of graphics is likely the worst I've heard. Have you seen most other MMOs? They look like cartoony pieces of crap in comparison to EVE, and yet EVE is at fault here somehow. What could they do to improve the graphics, really? Sounds I can partly agree with. Some sound effects are legacy by now and should be updated. Voice overs for a predominantly PvP game? Why exactly? PvE is not a focus of the game, and quite frankly the sheer recording time that would have to go into voicing fricking everything in the game would cost a fortune and that money is definately better spent elsewhere (opinion). The game has voice overs where it is needed and those are well done. In closing I'd like to say that your tone has the air of someone who is clearly bitter over the subject and have serious trouble getting over it and rages just for the sake of it. If you do not like EVE Online, fine, I accept that. I don't like Skyrim, but I don't go out of my way to berate it in every way I can to people who genuinely love it it. Neither do I say it "sucks" straight off without motivating what I do not like with it. In fact, I strive to not use emotionally loaded words at all when arguing an opinion. I fail, quite often honestly, but I strive not to color what I say with emotional outbursts.

Sowwy!

I definately agree, AD I can severely acid-mouthed sometimes when I believe someone is WRONG ON THE INTERNET. But yes, EVE can definately get boring, especially if someone decides that all there is to EVE is to run missions and make ISK. Yay? EVE is very much a "It is what you make it game" and those definately do not cater to every kind of person. Clearly not, as we can see easily by comparing subscriptions to WoW. 350k versus...millions? That, however, does not make it bad game by any stretch. Just different. Kind of like Dwarf Fortress.

Aye, I think it was the setting (and the agonizingly sluggish combat) that made me drop it. It just felt like a joke compared to the very much darker predecessors.

Wow, Cyllan, you REALLY believe that people that play pirates in the game are assholes in real life? How deluded can you get? It's a game. You are given mechanics in the game for playing any type of character as you wish. Some choose villians, some not. I'm something inbetween since I do both "carebeary" stuff and shoot people in the face. That doesn't mean I'm a terrible person in real life. It's a game and in a game you play to win by any means allowed by the game mechanics. Also the Goons are probably the universes biggest trolls. I wouldn't judge a game after what the Goons do In closing I'd like to ask you something: You REALLY do not like EVE Online and you even seem slightly butthurt about it, so why do you even care? Why do you feel this need to berate something that people obviously love and adore because it's unique in the world of bland MMOs? You're kinda like one of those console fanbois that have an incessant need to talk down the "other" consoles because clearly, yours is the best. Give it a rest. You don't like it, fine, we get that. But don't puke crap over it out of spite. Especially not when most of everything you say is biased opinion not based in fact.

I clearly fail at communicating. Yes, I know this release is just a bugfix (and I was eager to test it) but I was equally excited about the teaser picture Also, Chris, it probably didn't show very well but my "here" in my post about the Combat GUI was actually a link to a thread where you showed some mockups of a new combat GUI. Since that GUI is not present in the farm teaser pic, I was wondering if it was dropped of if we are to expect a new combat GUI anytime "soon".